Hi

I have just started looking at the Grade 6 theory book by Aston & Webb and am stuck already (believe or not!).

Have just about worked out what the numbers mean and some of the rules (though there seem to be a fair few, and i find a big block of text just does not help digest it easily)

On exercise 1 where it says "realise the chords indicated" i am confused when there is either a "-" (i think that means the bass nots changes but the chord from the previous one is used...do i have to write that in?

and secondly..what do I do when there is a number written but no notes written whatsoever...eg.

F (in bass) (no notes)

6 5
4 3


also is there an easier way of learning this, as I do not have a teacher and so cannot get my work checked. It says to start with the soprano first but im finding it hard and working out all the chords as I go along....the amount of checks you have to do to ensure there are no consecutive octaves or 5ths...i will be there all night!!

any helpful websites?

Please help

Thanks!

The first thing I would do when working this question is to go through and identify what all the chords are.
You can use 'jazz' notation (G major... E7 etc.) or just pencil in the notes above the bass on the bottom stave or on a spare piece of manuscript.
After that it's a matter of fitting it in without breaking the rules.
I don't think I'd have managed too well without a teacher to check but some people do.
You have to check intervals between all pairs of parts.
a "-" means the chord doesn't change and where you have figures but no new note the chord changes over the same bass note.
You might find it helful to use one of the Harmony workbooks first.

To be honest, I think that even if you can sort out one or two lessons with a good teacher of theory, it would be well worth it, as a good teacher might jut provide the all-important 'light bulb moments', particularly if you've done a lot of learning by yourself already. Once you feel you're getting somewhere with the understanding of the theory, from books or wherever, try a few past exam papers, and take them with you, both to be marked for what you feel you have 'got', and to ask questions about what you just don't understand. And, of course, keep on asking here what you can't work out by yourself!

BTW http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figured_bass isn't a bad introduction, particularly if you have enough keyboard skills to play the short examples on the piano, to give them more relevance.

Is that what you mean? Was the F given, or just the key?

Thank you all for your replies...

in that example...where there is a 5/3m, there are no notes above it....and the notes before it are minims

This PDF file might be of use to you: http://www.robertkelleyphd.com/FiguredBass.pdf. I found it quite useful when I was learning figured bass.

An easy way to think of it is: the numbers represent the degree of the scale to which the note is. For example, a 5/3 below a bass note of F would mean that the chord is F, A, C. Every number is not always written and these need to be learnt. If there are no numbers beneath the stave, the chord is presumed to be 5/3. A 6 on its own is just a short hand way of writing 6/3. A common mistake a lot of people make is thinking that a 6 means 6/4, but 6/4 is always written in full. A 7 on its own means 7/5/3. 6/5 mean 6/5/3. 4/3 means 6/4/3. 4/2 mean 6/4/2.

A # on its own always refers to the third. For example, if there was just a # below a bass note of F, this would imply 5/#3, thus being F A# C. A '-' simply means that the bass note changes but the chord from before is to be used.

I think that is pretty much all you need to know with regard to figured bass for Grade 6. Sorry if I haven't explained things very well, but I hope this helps.

Yep (although in my scratchy memory I don't recall seeing 4/3 - I'll come back to this.)

Another way to think about it is if you know the names & shapes of chords from Grade 5. So a note with nothing underneath (implying figures 5/3) is a root position triad, 6 (implying 6/3) is a first inversion triad, 6/4 is a second inversion triad, 7 is a root position triad with a 7th, 6/5 is a first inversion 7th chord, 4/2 is probably a last inversion of a dominant 7th (or might be a suspension in the bass). I think you're more likely to see 4 -3 as two horizontal figures meaning a 4-3 suspension (the 3 being the resolution, eg, CFG - CEG). The only chord I can think 6/4/3 would be is the second inversion of a dominant 7th, and that's much more likely to be figured just 6/3, if I remember correctly. Figured bass parts tend to put in the minimum figuring needed to imply the correct functional harmony, so if they can leave out any figures for notes implied by the other figures, they do.

Whatever way round you go, the more you can try to apply a method on an actual keyboard, the better your learning will be, as you'll be able to relate the figuring to real aural chords and hand shapes. As long as you've got basic keyboard skills, try starting with some simple cadential progressions, say ii7b V7 I, and then do the same with figured bass (in C major the same progression would be F (6/5) G (7) C, with the figures written as figures above the notated notes in the bass. )

I agree with neal_sam. The 4-3 written horizontally does mean a suspension, and 6/4/3 written vertically is the full figuring for a second inversion of a dominant 7th. However, the 6 is omitted not the 4, so 4 with a 3 underneath is used (according to my notes for Grade 8).

So the vertical figuring for dom 7ths

Root 7(5 3) First Inv 6 5 (3) Second Inv (6) 4 3 Third Inv (6) 4 2

I find these quite hard to remember but I'm getting there

Yes, I agree with cambiata, it is the 6 that is omitted not the 4, because 6/3 would indicate that it is a 6/3 triad (e.g. with an F bass: F, A, D), however this is not used in the Grade 6 syllabus.

OK, I was just going on my memory of playing from figured bass parts, not the AB syllabus, so I'm happy to be corrected. Though I might just go off and have a look through some real-life figured bass parts to see how faulty my memory is. Off to IMSLP....

EDIT - right, I've just had a quick scan through Handel's entire Op.1 Sonatas, and can't find one example of the figuring 6/4/3 or 4/3 (though it was a quick scan - I would be delighted to be contradicted.) I think that in usual baroque practice (so don't use this in the exam) that a second inversion dom 7th is actually effectively just figured 6 (not 6/3 - apologies, my mistake), as I'd argue that, as Handel never unambiguously figures a second inversion dom 7th, he would consider V7c and viib as interchangeable. So, for instance, in C major, a D figured 6 could have F, G & B or just F & B, and the chord has exactly the same harmonic function - the omission or otherwise of the G doesn't alter the effect of the chord, so Handel (and other baroque composers) weren't fussy about specifying it. Hence the much more quickly recognised 6, rather than 6/4/3. As I say, I just can't remember ever having seen 6/4/3 or 4/3 in any mainstream baroque continuo part. Please do prove me wrong.

Further homework....

I've managed to find the Bach Sonatas for Flute & Continuo with very detailed figuring, including 6/4/3, so obviously it is used, contrary to my earlier assertion. Even better, you can see the 6/4/3 figure in Bach's own handwriting here in the second quaver of the second bar.

Did anyone else do such detailed figured bass parts?

Hi Brian,

Sorry so long getting back to post a reply. Anyway, I can confirm that the 4/3 figured bass exists in the Butterworth HIP book and 'Harmony in Context' by Steinitz and Sterman. However, I would assume that these books are very prescriptive to help students prepare for exams etc, whereas in real-life performance practice, different conventions will be used and perhaps a short-hand figuring for very experienced performers who realise figured bass at sight. It's interesting you found an example in the Bach but not in Handel

Spot on, I reckon, Cambiata (though interesting that Bach writes out 6/4/3 in full in the examples I gave). I suspect that the sort of detailed figuring that Bach did in such examples has to be taken as the standard for exam contexts to prevent ambiguity.

Clearly I haven't done enough playing of complicated Bach continuo parts ... I'd still be interested if anyone can tell me off-hand if any other composers figured to this degree, or if Bach was atypical.